Goodbye, blogger.

I am making the move to Wordpress. My new blog can be found here.

John Anderson is a real Blogger now

Though no longer on Blogger.com, John Anderson is now a real blogger. He is this month's featured biblioblogger. Congrats!

Esteban's Covenantal Blessings Book Giveaway

In honor of his moving to Wordpress (something I'm contemplating myself...and would most undoubtedly do if I won this book give away...), Esteban is giving away a copy of Peter Flint's, "The Bible at Qumran: Text, Shape, and Interpretation". In order to be eligible for this, you have to follow his simple rules:

1. First, that you announce my change of address and this giveway on your own blog, and provide a link to your announcement in the comments to this post. (Note that WordPress blogs generate automatic pingbacks, and therefore you don’t need to provide if a link if you blog on WordPress.)

2. Second, that in your comment you provide your most creative theory regarding the identity of the Qumran community (if there was one, according to your theoretical construct). Obvious things like the Essenes and the Golbian Hasmonean fortress are out of the question. I, for instance, hold that Qumran housed the easternmost (and most learned) first-century outpost of the KISS Army.


I have already announced Esteban's move to Wordpress earlier, but I will remind you that his new link is in my blogroll and can also be found here: http://www.voxstefani.wordpress.com

As to the second requirement: contrary to the nonsense being propagated by so-called "Experts" on Qumran (with their fancy book-larnin') like Robert Cargill, I know very well that Qumran was originally Superman's summer Fortress of Solitude. Everyone knows Superman was wildly religious. In fact, I think Superman is probably the key to unlocking Daniel 7.

A Question about Ph.D Programs

Is it okay to apply to a Ph.D program at a school that isn't exactly well-known for your field to study with a professor who is very well known in your field? When one goes to apply for jobs, will it be, "He studied under...." or, "He went to X school"?

Another Blog goes to Wordpress

Indeed, Nick Norelli over at Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth announces that Esteban Vázquez has moved over to Wordpress. I'm really beginning to wonder if I should convert.

Here are Esteban's new digs: http://www.voxstefani.wordpress.com

Reading: Daniel Kirk's "Unlocking Romans"

I was surprised our library actually has his book, but lo and behold, ECU is redeemed. I'm really looking forward to reading through this over the next week.

"Saul who is also called Paul" - Michael Compton and the Patristic interpretation of "Paul"

I'm currently reading through different essays in "In Dominico Eloquio: In Lordly Eloquence: Essays on Patristic Exegesis in Honor of Robert Louis Wilken." Recently I read through Michael Compton's essay on the Patristic interpretation of the names of the Apostle Paul. He writes:

What is the relationship between these two names? To many Christians (and non-Christians as well), the answer to the question has been and continues to be quite obvious. For them there is, in fact, no problem at all: Saul the persecuting Pharisee received the name Paul when he converted to Christianity. I confess that this is the answer I was first taught, and I have met many who were taught likewise.

Indeed, this was something I had always assumed as well. Saul isn't used anywhere in the Epistles and when one reads Acts, Luke phases out using Saul in favor of using Paul. Thus, it was natural to assume some kind of a name change had occurred. Compton's article focuses on a few ancient interpreters who shared this view - Jerome, Augustine, etc. Though Origen had already stated that no name change had taken place. Compton focuses especially on Chrysostom, whom Compton believes is responding to the "triumphalist" view of Jerome. Essentially, Jerome's view was that because Sergius Paulus was Paul's first convert (Acts 13:7), Saul took Paul's name.(cf. De Viris Illustribus 5 (PL 23:615) quoted on pg 58). Kind of an odd interpretation, but there you have it.

The article also mentions G.A. Harrer who espoused the theory that Paul was "the Apostle's cognomen while 'Saul' was his signum."(pg 53) I wonder if anyone has anything to say about that, because it seems like a convincing theory to me.

New Blogs added to the Blogroll

Neither blog is "new", but new to my blogroll. One is John Anderson's "Hesed we 'emet" (which I believe is: steadfast love/loyalty and faithfulness). John is a Ph.D student at Baylor working in Biblical studies, focusing on Hebrew Bible. His "blog" (though he has just switched to Wordpress*) is very interesting.

The other blog is by my friend, Danny Garland. Danny is a recent graduate from Franciscan University of Steubenville with an MA in Theology (2008). He teaches theology at a Catholic high school up North. Danny and I lived together when I was up north. He's an exceptionally nice guy and was actually my sponsor when I came into the Church (being a convert himself). His blog is "Irish Catholic and Dangerous" - he is both.



*I've seen several people lately make the switch to Wordpress. Should I? Is there something amazing about Wordpress that I'm missing out on?

A bit of trivia

Who wrote in their journal, "quippe dormire nefas videbatur" after studying a very important manuscript through the night?

Brandon Wason returns to blogging

After closing down his blog Novum Testamentum, he has finally returned to blogging. Go see his new site here.

Friday is for funny words - οἰνοβαρείων

This week's funny word comes to us from Homer. Every other week I attend an "Ancient Greek Reading Group" and we're working our way through Book IX of Homer's Odyssey (one of my favorite parts). Our word this week is: οἰνοβαρείων - to be "wine heavy" or drunk. This word is used to describe the Cyclops after Odysseus has gotten the Cyclops drunk off of the wine on his ship. Immediately thereafter, Odysseus and crew shove a red-hot log into the Cyclops' eye.

At any rate, because I'm taking Latin all summer, I'm giving you a double-whammy. Not only is οἰνοβαρείων interesting/funny in its own right, but the Latin equivalent is: crapulatus.

My Latin textbook makes no sense

I realize that writing a new grammar for a language that has been taught for thousands of years requires a bit of confidence. It says, "The other ways in which this language is taught are not good enough, but my ideas are the bee's knees."

However, the grammar I'm using (Latin for Reading) makes no sense when it comes to listing the cases of nouns and adjectives. Instead of the standard Nominative, Genitive, Dative, Accusative, Ablative, and perhaps the Vocative, this text lists them as: Nominative, Accusative, Ablative, Dative, Genitive.

So, if I memorize the paradigm for a noun using this order, I'm imagining that I'll run into problems if I continue studying Latin elsewhere and they use a different grammar. It won't be that much of an inconvenience, but it seems like such an arbitrary change that has no benefits.

A quick note on criticism

In my Archaeology of the New Testament World class we had a final paper due at the end of the semester. My paper, titled, "Even the coins will cry out: Numismatic Explanations for the Jewish War" received a good grade (an A), but it also received some constructive criticism....lots of it.

I wasn't sure how to handle it. It was almost as if the grade didn't matter because I felt like my paper must be bad if it had so many notes. After about 30 minutes of feeling really puzzled I realized that I absolutely must get used to this if I'm going to go on and do graduate work. The fact that the paper received high marks should make me realize I have a good argument that after being refined could be a great argument. In fact, I'm considering rewriting it over the summer with the notes and sources that the professor provided.

Friday is for funny words

I've seen quite a few "Friday is for..." series and I wanted to start my own. I don't have any friends, so Scot McKnight's idea wouldn't work. However, I do like odd Greek words that I run across in my readings. Thus...Friday is for funny words.

This week's word is "εγγαστρίμῦθος": Belly-Myther.

Liddel-Scott has it listed as "ventriloquist" and someone who "prophecies from the belly." The most famous "belly-myther" is the Belly-Myther of Endor 1 Samuel 28 (1 Kingdoms 28 in the LXX). As Margaret Mitchell has pointed out, she's neither a witch in Hebrew or Greek. In fact, Mitchell has written an excellent book along with Rowan Greer on interpretations of 1 Kingdoms 28 in antiquity. A few of the passages from Patristic authors who discuss the "belly-myther" are bellow:

Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho105

καὶ ὅτι μένουσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ ἀπεδειξα ὑμῖν ἐχ τοῦ καὶ τὴν Σαμουὴλ ψυχὴν χληθῆναι ὑπὸ τῆς ἐγγαστριμύθου, ὡς ἠξίωσεν ό Σαούλ.

And I have proved to you that souls survive on the basis of the fact that even Samuel's soul was summoned by the belly-myther, as Saul requested.

The Martyrdom of Pionius

ἔστι δὲ γεγραμμένον ὅτι ὁ Σαοὺλ ἐπηρώτησεν τὴν ἐγγαστρίμυθον καὶ εἶπεν τῇ γυναιχὶ τῇ οὕτω μαντευομένῃ, "ἀνάγαγέ μοι τὸν Σαμουὴλ."

It is written that Saul asked the belly-myther and that he said to the woman who was divining through this means, 'Bring up for me Samuel the prophet'.

And, of course, you should read Origen's homily on 1 Kingdoms 28. I suggest picking up Mitchell and Greer's book where you can read it.

Luther on Origen

An interesting quote by Luther on Origen (as quoted in the essay by Judith Kovacs in the book mentioned below):

In toto Origene non est verbum unum de Christo.

"In all of Origen there is not one word of Christ."

Reading this semester

I've been very busy lately with exams, finishing papers, etc. It has been a great semester. I have about a week off and then I'm jumping into a summer-long Latin class. This Fall I'll be applying to graduate programs and I realize that with the economy the way it is programs that are already very competitive will become even more so. So, I've been reading books suggested to me by professors at various schools as well as working my way through U of Chicago's "History of Christianity" reading list.

Some great books and articles I've read (both on and off these lists) lately are:

Elizabeth A. Clark, "The Origenist Controversy: The Cultural Construction of an Early Christian Debate." - This book is fantastic. Though I originally was disinterested in some of the methods she uses from other fields, I found myself really enjoying the explanations they afforded. Dr. Clark's book put into perspective the social dimension of a debate between early Christians and it really helped to see why particular people held out in particular camps.

"In Eloquio Dominico: In Lordly Eloquence: Essays on Patristic Exegesis in Honor of Robert Louis Wilken." - This book has essays by people like John Cavadini, Brian Daley, Judith Kovacs, etc. Wilken is one of my favorite scholars of patristic exegesis. His "The Christians as the Romans Saw Them" was the first book I read by him and I was hooked immediately. This book is a gold mine of essays that highlight the many valuable things Patristics can teach modern Biblical scholars. I particularly enjoyed Gary Anderson's article on Adam and Eve; John Cavadini's essay on the aqedah in Philo, Origen, and Ambrose; Michael Compton's insightful essay on the significance of the names Saul and Paul; and Judith Kovacs' essay on Origen's homilies on 1 Corinthians.

Brant Pitre, "Jesus, the Tribulation, and the End of Exile: Restoration Eschatology and the Origin of the Atonement." I had promised a chapter-by-chapter review of the book, but I can't find it in myself to sit down and write a short review of each chapter. The whole book is too good. I've said it earlier, but I feel like this book could cause some major paradigm shifts in historical Jesus research.

A book that doesn't deal with the early Church, but was written by a professor here at ECU is "The War Against Catholicism: Liberalism and the Anti-Catholic Imagination in Nineteenth -Century Germany". Michael B. Gross is one of our history professors here and this is an edited version of his dissertation done at Brown. Though the anti-Semitic movement in Europe is well-documented, Dr. Gross describes the anti-Catholic sentiment that played out in various facets of German political and social life.

Ben Witherington III, "New Testament Rhetoric: An Introductory Guide to the Art of Persuasion in and of the New Testament" - I really like most of what Dr. Witherington writes and this book is no exception. He was only a few feet away from me when I bought this at SBL but I was too nervous to ask him to sign it...you snooze, you lose. At any rate, I found this a great introductory book and would probably suggest this to someone before having them read George A. Kennedy's, "Comparative Rhetoric."

A.J. Levine, "The Misunderstood Jew: The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus." I don't necessarily always agree with Levine, but when she's right, she's very right. Her assessment of modern academics not drinking deeply enough from the well of ancient texts is spot on.


One of my really odd interests is in the Ladder Day Saints (or Mormons). Ever since I was about 17 I've really enjoyed reading LDS literature. One particular issue that I find interesting is their idea of baptism for the dead (by proxy). I recently read an article by R.E. DeMaris entitled "Corinthian Religion and Baptism for the Dead (1 Corinthians 15:29): Insights from Archaeology and Anthropology." JBL 114 (1995) 661-682.

Preserving idioms in translation...

..is difficult. I had to translate some lines in Sophocles' Antigone and write a short commentary. Kreon, the newly-crowned tyrannical king, states that:

οὐδὲν γὰρ ἀνθρώποισιν οἷον ἄργυρος κακὸν νόμισμ' ἔβλαστε.

The play on words here is difficult to keep in translation. Kreon is making a pun on νόμισμα and I'm not quite sure how to maintain it.

How would you translate it?

Saint Fidelis and Calvinists

Thanks to Taylor Marshall of Canterbury Tales for pointing out this interesting story.

Roger Pearse on Attis and Jesus

An interesting survey of the sources from antiquity concerning Attis and the lack of parallels with Jesus (despite the often made claims).

Mark on Mark

Mark Goodacre has brought up a good discussion on Mark 15:39 and the soldier's statement:

37. ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀφεὶς φωνὴν μεγάλην ἐξέπνευσεν. 38. Καὶ τὸ καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη εἰς δύο ἀπ' ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω. 39 Ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ κεντυρίων ὁ παρεστηκὼς ἐξ ἐναντίας αὐτοῦ ὅτι οὕτως ἐξέπνευσεν εἶπεν, Ἀληθῶς οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος υἱὸς θεοῦ ἦν.

Dr. Goodacre has asked the question: is this really a confession or is it a sarcastic remark on the soldier's part? His commenters have already noted several instances of ironic and sarcastic remarks throughout the passion narrative (as have I here). The question posed by some has been whether it's either sarcastic or confessional and I want to say that it's both.

If Mark is written as "Gospel" and these gospels were inherently liturgical from the get-go, then I think it has a double meaning. Irony only works in favor of the reader/hearer, not against them. It brings the reader closer to the author's/text's viewpoint, even if it's against the person who spoke the words. The readers/hearers have the 'inside scoop'. So, even if the soldier's remark is sarcastic, when the text was read aloud in the liturgy and heard by the people, they knew that "surely this man was (is) the son of God".